Youtube video of gravity device principle.. ?

[mondrasek]

Mondrasek,

You got it!  The amount of work needed to empty and refill the container can be reduced to a very small amount.  The output unit produces a constant amount of energy.

I will be adding another video to show how we might decrease the energy needed to empty and refill the reservoir even more.  And finally, I will begin presenting specifics.  I will appreciate any help in discovering better designs.

Do you now see that perpetual motion is viable?  I want a group of people to help design, then build, a working system (possibly at a university).

Building and designing this thing as an individual is overwhelming.  I am merely the individual who brought up the feasible idea.  Everyone can help to create some final products.

Gavin,

As I said from the start, I believe I understood all the pieces.  Including the way you planned to shift the water.  But I have yet to see you present a system that uses this effect that could work in it's entirety.  So no, I do not see that perpetual motion as you are describing it is viable.  Those specifics would appear to also be necessary from the start, for me at least.  Without them this idea appears to have huge gaps in logic.

M.

[spinner]

@Gavin
You're very determined with your idea... Nothing wrong with that!
But, maybe there's a possibility that you are the one who is missing something...?

People are claiming that I can not reduce the distance below X, where I claim that the distance can be reduced to 2 * X / n.
Just view my clip and tell me what does not make sense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIA2rZQgO_c

That was never a real issue... You can reduce the distance to lift the same amount of liquid (mass) with the help of partitioning all way to the practical limits...
But it seems you're totally missing the "closing the loop" principle (so you can evaluate energy exchanges and a possibility for a surplus (OU)... ).
Your shifting mass or "drain, lift, drain" cycle uses reduced height difference with more partitions, but it also provides reduced energy potential (what you can get out of the system) in the first place...
I've seen the YT video showing "partitioning principle". Try to draw "partition containers" on the same side of the original container. Do you see a flaw now?  How about a combined "Center of Gravity" for all the partitioning containers wrt. the original one?

You are actually reducing a height needed with the partitioning scheme... But you are loosing the same amount of a "useful" energy which you can get out of it at the end, too.

A single reservoir (in a cycle) has a m(2h)g potential, with 2 partitions you have a m(2/2)hg, with 3 part. m(2/3)hg,...  8 partitions = m(2/8)hg , etc...

I do not think that people are grasping my point.  Do not approach this with a preconception.

Yes, you're right.  But I think that you should avoid having your own (personal) preconceptions, too! It seems you have a "fixed idea" about your concept (which may not be a good thing afterall...)

I have had experts at the National Science Foundation tell me that the partitioning scheme is very intelligent.  Once you guys understand the partitioning scheme, it follows that a perpetual system may be created.

I certainly don't know what or who or what the "NSF" is. And, regarding the "partitioning scheme", it is is interesting, but what - exactly - is it good for? Sorry to say, but I only see an overcomplicated mass handling... For me, absolutely nothing which can be linked to any kind of "Perpetual motion" possibility.. Sorry.

The guys at the NSF could not fathom a device which produces more energy than what is needed to reset it to the initial state.

This partitioning principle is far from being an overunity device. Please, see previous posts. Especially the ones made by the people like Hans and TinselKoala... They certainly know what they're talking about!

The liquid only drops a distance of:      X / n    , then is lifted a distance:     2 * X / n

And yes, the US NSF.  You guys should not assume that I am wrong.  I realize that I must convey my understanding to you, but please come into this with an open mind.  Go to my youtube post of partitioning and ask me questions instead of insisting I am wrong.

Yes, liquid drops a distance of X/n, then is lifted a distance of 2X/n... And then it is drained back to an original position with X/n . So, (X/n)-(2X/n)+(X/n) = complete cycle (which should be zero under ideal conditions...) Or, UNITY wrt. to all Energy interchanges (what you get OUT is what you put IN - minus losses)..

Mondrasek, you got it!  The amount of work needed to empty and refill the container can be reduced to a very small amount.  The output unit produces a constant amount of energy.

I will be adding another video to show how we might decrease the energy needed to empty and refill the reservoir even more.  And finally, I will begin presenting specifics.  I will appreciate any help in discovering better designs.

Do you now see that perpetual motion is viable?  I want a group of people to help design, then build, a working system (possibly at a university).

Building and designing this thing as an individual is overwhelming.  I am merely the individual who brought up the feasible idea.  Everyone can help to create some final products.

Gavin, If a "Perpetuum Mobile", or "OverUnity" would be THAT simple, It would already be invented centuries ago....   

Please, don't take my post as a debunking attack. Like many (all) people here (or anywhere), I'd like to see the success!

Cheers!

[GavinPalmer1984]

Ignore potential energy inside of the partitioning scheme.  I have not yet addressed exactly how to use that potential.  Just realize the cost in emptying and refilling a container is very small when using my partitioning scheme.

The key point which I want spinner to understand:
The output from the overall system will come from the output unit.  The potential for the output unit is a constant amount.  And the output unit resets with a change in liquid depth.  So essentially, the reset mechanism can be reduced with partitioning.

I do not think that anyone has thought to do the partitioning scheme (even if they have) and combine it with a device which resets due to a change in liquid depth.

So I repeat:
The output comes from the output unit.  And the input to the system comes from lifting the partitions.
Output is constant:
m * d
and Input is variable(I am sure this can be reduced even more):
M * X / n

Where d < X and m < M

I will begin sharing more specific work soon.  Continue to ask questions please.

[spinner]

Ignore potential energy inside of the partitioning scheme.  I have not yet addressed exactly how to use that potential.  Just realize the cost in emptying and refilling a container is very small when using my partitioning scheme.

Ok... But I don't see the point.

The key point which I want spinner to understand:
The output from the overall system will come from the output unit.  The potential for the output unit is a constant amount.  And the output unit resets with a change in liquid depth.  So essentially, the reset mechanism can be reduced with partitioning.

I do not think that anyone has thought to do the partitioning scheme (even if they have) and combine it with a device which resets due to a change in liquid depth.

So I repeat:
The output comes from the output unit.  And the input to the system comes from lifting the partitions.
Output is constant:
m * d
and Input is variable(I am sure this can be reduced even more):
M * X / n

Where d < X and m < M

I will begin sharing more specific work soon.  Continue to ask questions please.

How the Hell is your "output constant" while "input is variable"  Are you sure?

Ok, let's wait for the specifics....

Q: So, the catch is in the "output unit", not the "partitioning concept"?

[GavinPalmer1984]

The output unit has potential energy and exhausts that energy.  The output unit is in a container, and when that container is emptied half-way and refilled, the output unit resets, and the potential energy of the output unit goes back to what it was initially.

The original video demonstrates an output unit which can reset in a fashion described above.